California joined 21 democratic states on Monday to stop cuts to billions of dollars of NIH financial means that support medical research, and claims that the measures of Americans, the life-saving medical discoveries to cancer, diabetes and other main diseases benefit, become harm.
The lawsuit, which was submitted to the Federal District Court in Massachusetts, calls on a judge to force the National Institutes of Health, to stop 4 billion US dollars at universities and other research institutions, and claim that the loss of financing “to layoffs, suspension of clinical studies , Suspension of clinical studies will lead to the disorder of ongoing research programs and laboratory closures. “
UC President Michael Drake said in a statement on Monday that the cuts would be a “devastating blow” and that the university “was ready”.
The University of California and the California State University – main recipient of the NIH research financing – are not participated in the lawsuit. However, the UC officials submitted an explanation to support the case and said they would support other complaints that could submit academic research groups.
The NIH guideline, which has been announced, reduces more than half of its expenditure for overhead costs associated with research grants on Friday evening. The money describes “indirect funding” and pays off for research stocks, building maintenance, supply companies, support staff and other costs.
The lawsuit – Submitted by states, including Arizona, Michigan, New York, Hawaii and Massachusetts, claims that the NIH cuts shorten the federal law. It quotes part of a law about 2018 that forbids the NIH to make one -sided “deviations from the negotiation rates” in its overhead financial means at institutions. This part of the budget rule is “in every appropriation law that HHS still rules,” says the lawsuit and refers to the Ministry of Health and Human Services under which NIH works.
The Trump administration violates the law and wants to “avoid funds for medical research that help develop new healing and treatments for diseases,” California Atty. General Rob Bonta said in a statement in which the lawsuit was announced that was submitted against the Department of Health and Human Services and the NIH.
The NIH addressed the time to the Department of Heath and Human Services to get a comment on the suit. An HHS official refused to comment on the lawsuit because it is pending.
The NIH gives annual financing of more than 35 billion US dollars for a wide range of medical research on Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, heart disease and studies on military veterans and trauma.
The California universities are among the greatest recipients of NIH subsidies in the nation, and the UC receives more than half of the NIH distributions in the state. Stanford, CalTech, USC and the CSU also receive significant research grants.
“The operations here in California are particularly high. Our is a state that is known as a national and global leader in life -saving biomedical research, ”said Bonta. “I will not allow the Trump administration to endanger the extraordinary work of scientists, scientists, medical specialists and other employees.”
What the ni does
From Monday, the indirect financing sponsored by the NIH will be limited to 15% of the grants, of the 57% that many Ucla research projects receive, and the 64% at UC San Francisco, which has the highest rate in the UC system.
The new guideline would affect the grants, support ongoing research and new ones.
At the announcement of the cuts, the NIH implied in a social media contribution and on its website that universities spending too much tax money for overhead costs with large foundations.
A graphic that is posted to which Nih x account showed the billion -dollar foundations by Harvard, Yale and Johns Hopkins alongside their indirect financing rates. Harvards was highest at 69%. As a comparisonNiH quoted private foundations, including the Chan Zuckerberg initiative and the Gates Foundation, and said their overhead costs were 15% or lower.
“The United States should have the best medical research in the world,” said the NIH in Instructions published on his website. “It is therefore important to ensure that as many funds as possible for direct scientific research costs and not for the administrative effort.”
In an e -mail to The Times Monday, HHS spokesman Andrew G. Nixon said that most of these university institutions already have billions of dollars worth billions. “He also said that the department had the authority to” repay universities the excess major costs they had previously received “, but decided not to do so.
The department will evaluate the repayment of “directive selection and whether you are in the best interest of the American taxpayer”.
Why researchers say that the means are of essential importance
University director and medical researchers say that the money, although it has been referred to as “indirect financing”, is of essential importance for their work and pays off to keep life -saving science – from the proper storage of biological samples to the attitude of living Animals for medical attempts.
The lawsuit reflects your concerns.
“In order to carry out research, a university needs buildings and must maintain these buildings and supply them with warmth and electricity,” says the lawsuit. “A university also needs the infrastructure required to meet the legal, regulatory and reporting requirements. These furnishing costs cannot be attributed to a specific research project, but are still necessary so that research occurs. “
The lawsuit states to help the administrative support of the university, including personnel, IT support, cybersecurity and data servers, “help research without being due to certain subsidies or projects.”
The financing rates are negotiated in agreements between the government and the universities, the lawsuit has now been changed, but have now been changed one -sidedly.
“No law does not allow all current grants to change one -sidedly,” claims the submission. “No such power was conveyed here. In fact, the Congress has expressly restricted the authority of the NIH to retrospectively change the indirect cost rate. ”
The lawsuit adds that the Department of Health and Human Services also has its own regulations, which prevent the NIH from making “indiscriminately changes” at the grants. In the lawsuit it is claimed that the NIH “has drawn beyond its legal authority”.
What is at risk in California?
Last year, the NIH delivered 2.6 billion US dollars at 4.2 billion US dollars in federal prices in the San Francisco, San Diego and Los Angeles locations, which received most of the financing.
Stanford received 613 million US dollars in the same period. USC took more than 356 million US dollars at NIH funds last year. At 23 locations of the CSU, the NIH prices were $ 158 million last year. CalTech received more than 62 million US dollars.
“Like numerous institutions across the country, the University of California has rely on NIH subsidies to carry out life-saving research that benefits Americans nationwide,” said Drake. “Reasons of this size would meet the research and innovation company of our country a devastating blow, undermine our global competitiveness and, if it progresses, delay the progress towards treatment and remedies for many of the most serious diseases today. “
“This is not only an attack on science, but also on the health of America,” said Drake.
In a statement, USC officials said that the changes had “endangered” their medical research and “We work closely with partner organizations to treat this developing environment so that we can continue our work on behalf of public well -being”.
Jason Maymon, a CSU spokesman, said in an explanation that the cuts threaten “the future of the innovation of the pupils and scientific progress”.
“The funding of the federal scholarship is of crucial importance for the CSU teaching and research mission, which deals with some of the most urgent challenges in society in terms of healthcare, agriculture, water, fire protection and cyber security,” said Maymon.
In a statement on Saturday, Stanford Leaders said that the cuts at the university would be 160 million US dollars annually, which affects the “construction of the laboratory room, the purchase and maintenance of scientific instruments and the research computer.
“Indirect costs are the way the government invests in the research infrastructure for the nation and is of crucial importance for our research activities,” said Campus message, which Provost Jenny Martinez, Dean Dr. Lloyd Minor, and Vice Provost and Dean of Research David Studdert was signed.